“Climate Sceptics are all red herrings and quackery”

Get ready for the startling Proof by Motherhood Statements & WhiteWash. I’m loosely Paraphrasing Penny, taking the liberty of including the fuller more accurate message (that I’m sure she would want to share)… [then adding a few thoughts].

A strong global agreement is apparently “manifestly in Australia’s own national interest” (and worth paying billions upon billions for). Why?

10 Wong Reasons

1.Copenhagen wasn’t the complete failure that people say. (Who mentioned a red herring?) [Countries for the first time have signed a pledge that they will control the weather and keep temperatures from rising no more than 2 degrees. It has no legal meaning in any court, but leaders who break this will be embarrassed in public.]

2. Evidence, that I can’t name specifically, points to climate change happening more quickly than we thought. (Though CO2 levels are rising “dead linear”, sea levels have flattened off, and temperatures have so “stopped rising” that people are calculating the statistical chances that we could call this form of rising: “falling”. Ocean heat content change has gone negative. Nothing bar anything that’s important is getting worse faster than the IPCC predicted, except CO2 emissions (which kinda flies in the face of the idea that those emissions matter eh?) Strike that… the number of skeptics is accelerating, and the number of holes in the IPCC documents has gone exponential. Damn.) **

3. Australia needs an emission trading scheme on carbon because some people once did misleading campaigns on the safety of tobacco. That was a totally different debate about different topics, different risks, and a different level of evidence and among a different industry. There was no UN Agency involved, and the tradeable market was tiny in comparison. Also Medical research is audited by the FDA, and the IPCC is audited by… unpaid bloggers. But other than that, there are similarities.

4.We’ve had lots of “hottest ever records” broken lately: If you ignore all the inexplicable adjustments (like these in Darwin) and forget that temperatures have been rising for 150 years before carbon started to be pumped en-masse, that’s quite scary. (And don’t ask me what caused the Little Ice Age, or when that mystery factor stopped.)

5. People claim we’ve been “hoodwinked by scientists”. (Don’t they know that scientists never lie?) Obviously this is a silly claim, because “those hoodwinked would have to include … Margaret Thatcher”. [Wong actually says exactly that. As if Margaret Thatcher would know in the 80’s that Phil Jones and a cabal of friends would say “Hide the Decline” a decade or two later… Really? Does she think naming a conservative politician who agreed with her a quarter of a century ago is like a free ticket to the land of “convincing’? Has anyone asked Mrs T what she thinks lately? ]

6. The IPCC AR4 is 3000 pages long. (Not that I would ever give you a red herring). Argumentum by documentum ad infinitum. [ So 2 + 2 = 4 is wrong because it fits on one page? If you pay me $10 million I can make that a 3000 page proof. ]

7. Models that assume disasters are “caused by carbon” have projected disasters that are (shock me) “caused by carbon”. The Minister has been known to wave this around as “evidence”.

8. Carbon markets “work” in Europe.$133 billion dollars turned over in 2009, lining profit sheets of bankers, auditors, accountants and government officials. These markets work well to suck spending power from citizens and buy yachts for financial CEO’s. They also help to screw poor peasants in China and India. “Multipurpose” is the word.

9. Politicians in Canberra have all taken out insurance on their homes for fire or theft. [And I’m planning to sell them a policy for Asteroid Damage. Who could refuse? I mean, you never know if you’ll come home one day to find a remnant from the formation of the solar system in the spot where your living room used to be.]

10. One of the disastrous humiliating claims about IPCC errors was shown to be not quite as grovellingly awful as it first appeared. And the IPCC fixed one of their other mistakes. Rajandra Pachauri knew about the error before Copenhagen, and it only took front page headlines calling for his resignation to force him to stop attacking the whistleblowers as “voo-doo” practictioners and start getting the science right. Who could ask for more?

Bonus point: Anything you say in disagreement with the above shows you are funded by big oil and trained by Phillip Morris. Therefore the World is Warming. D-QED*.

What’s scary about this is that people who are supposed to represent the public (our elected representatives) are using the equivalent of a medieval witchhunt to run the country, and the people who are supposed to inform the public (the journalists) don’t seem to notice.

*D-QED: Don’t Question the Evidence, Denier.
** Since you asked: We skeptics can offer specific evidence that the carbon-dioxide theory is falsified: the missing hotspot, most carbon dioxide emissions have happened since WWII but it has been warming at a roughly steady rate since 1750, analysis of outgoing radiation observations by Lindzen and Choi, cloud feedback observations by Spencer, etc. See my links page for more information.]

The views represented in articles republished on the this site reflect the views of the original author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Australian Protectionist Party

Comments

Shamrock,
Simple Answer: People dont like to read, and since the mass media don't (read won't) report on the important 'FACTS" then people dont know.

How many people would read through the whole of the ETS manifesto? Not many at all. And those that do may not want the Australian Public to know about the bad things.

I agree that if the majority of the people did know (and wanted to open their eyes and look at the really scarey monster), then not only would they see the nuLabour for what it really is, they would also see all the other 'fat cats' in Canberra for what they really are as well. Note: there are some excellent pollies in canberra, but they are few and far between.

Brian you have hit the nail on the head! It's come to light now that the climate change scare tactics by Wong and the ALP, plus some of the Greens is in fact a rouse to grab back the stimulus package doled out last year. There BROKE! and can't find the money for other projects.

The ETS (Big Tax on everything) will be stopped in the Senate the buy liberals will see to that, I hope then this brings a double disillusion trigger and the KRUDD Government go for early elections.
1. Their undermining project they have envisage for us will be put on hold.
2. With the way they the KRUDD Government have handled the Australian economy, the populace are starting to catch on that they are inept in the matters of running a large economy like ours.
3. Garrett can't be a ALP member, because his inept approach to his portfolio and the damage that has been brought upon 90,000 homes suspected of burning from bad insulation products, 160,000 homes with sub standard materials and the loss of thousands of industry related jobs. Then the Taxpayer picking up the 43 million proposed by Krudd to retrain insulation workers. Will surely make the public bewildered and disillusioned.

Surely all this will work against public sentiment to have them ALP re-elected, if not a smaller lower house representation.
The best news I think, is that it will be a stellar year for APP as these debarcales will be cannon fodder for our Senate candidates.

Protecting the environment should be everyone's concern, that being said, we certainly don't need a ETS to do that. As much as it pains me to say it but Abbot is on the right track, by creating offset and actively undoing environmental damage in the long term and with some expansion we in Australia could not onll be much better off environmentally but our health as people could also be benifited by a much cleaner environment.

Australia though is not absolutely reliant on OPEC for oil, merely, the Globalised Oil Trade means you have little say in where the oil you purchase comes from. Unfortunate as that is, Australia's oil consumption is a drop in the ocean compared to the US of A, EU or China.

If we didn't spend hours every week stuck in traffic chaos our oil consumption would also decline dramatically, so pushing for better roads is a must for a better environment.

To my shame I believed in the begining about humans involvment in climate change, but after doing investigating into the "science" I changed my mind.

I still believe in recycling though, only to reduce our dependance on opec oil, and the fact that why throw it away if you can reuse it. alternative fuel sorces are good, if only to remove our dependance on opec "read middle east aka islamic aka sharia aka terrorist funding of osama bin liner and others", reinvigorate Australian production to give Australians jobs, stop brining in over seas labour and we can reduce unimployment to 5% real terms not 5% unreal terms.